In most settings be it politics or even corporate life, the downside risk of saying "I did wrong. I'm sorry" is high

Rationalizing missteps pays off better than acknowledging mistakes - the latter is seen as a weakness

Yet few people cogitate on how to reduce this downside risk

One counter-argument to this is -

Rationalization and non-admission of supposed "mistakes" is a good thing, as it contributes to intellectual diversity

Else we sort of acknowledge there is one "right" course - and all other courses are "mistakes" that ought to be shunned

So one can make a conservative case for the status-quo by arguing that greater introspection is merely a cover for supporting the idea of "progress", and a means of suppressing the many varied forms of prejudices that contribute to intellectual diversity

E.g. Parts of the scientific establishment, steeped in "Enlightenment" principles, may complain that religious people have not "reformed" - they have not accepted their mistakes, and still refuse to accept the scientific "truth"

But hang on...if everyone were to toe the "scientific truth" and acknowledge that that whatever was embraced in the past was an "error", then science becomes a new religion of its own

It contributes to a certain ideological totalitarianism

So maybe what seems to us as "pig-headed obstinacy" is a good thing

By refusing to acknowledge error, but rather making a case for our own ideological distinctiveness, we are guarding ourselves against group-think and moral homogeneity

But yes, things can be taken to an extreme, when obstinacy becomes a virtue in itself, and any acknowledgment of error on the part of one's tribe becomes politically unacceptable

There's a point when the benefits of diversity are not sufficient to outweigh the costs of stupidity

So it's a fine balance

This reminds me of a statistical concept - ANOVA - where we often analyze two types of variances -

Within-group variance
Variance across groups

Now tribal unity, and championing of different types of prejudices, ensures against universal group-think.

And it helps increase variance in views across groups

But it comes at the cost of reducing variance within a group - where everyone is supposed to be loyal

In contrast the liberal championing of individualism and individual conscience increases diversity within groups

But by championing the idea of progress and the notion of "objective truth" - it's susceptible to groupthink across groups

It tends to reduce variance across groups

So the framework of ANOVA helps us understand the shortcomings of Scientism, liberal individualism on one hand, but also the blindspots of tribalism, conservative championing of group-level diversity on the other

There is a tendency to read literal translations of Bhagavad Gita sans any commentary

Even when commentaries are preferred, it is usually those of Adi Śankara or Rāmānujā, or in some cases a new bhashya like that of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava teacher - Prabhupāda

The commentary of Śankara is of course the earliest extant commentary on the Gita

And the most widely cited

Yet while it is often eulogized, my personal observation is that there is a tendency to underrate later medieval commentaries.

Some of the later Bhāṣyas are often much more comprehensive and thorough in charting out the intellectual history of specific ideas discussed in the Gita than the earliest Bhāṣyas like those of Śankara or Rāmānujā - that are often fairly terse.

On 4 occasions Cohen said, under oath, that "the job he wanted" (and got) was being personal attorney for the President of the United States. @PreetBharara, you've here retweeted a tweet that falsely says "Cohen denied aspiring to work for Trump during testimony before Congress."

1/ Words matter—especially to lawyers. @dcexaminer *could've* said "Cohen denied aspiring to work for [the] Trump [administration] during testimony before Congress," but that might not have gotten notice from @PreetBharara—as it would've been too nuanced to make sufficient waves.

2/ I and many others—indeed a majority of those polled in the most recent public polling—found Cohen credible in part because a *lawyer* saying (in paraphrase) "I wanted to be the president's personal attorney rather than work in the White House Counsel's Office" makes *sense*.

Abang Mercy asked question on why @fkeyamo known to stand for Nigerians is standing with Buhari.....
"Posterity will reckon me on the right side of history".....@fkeyamo 2019
When #FestusKeyamoSpeaks, you've got to learn👏👏👏👏 Sorry, your browser doesn't support embedded videos

On human right records, #FestusKeyamoSpeaks clearly...
"We must be careful of all these blank statement: When we say these things, you will think that there are political prisoners in Nigeria".... Sorry, your browser doesn't support embedded videos

The Ecowas court had asked Dasuki to be released, is that not enough to question the human right record of
this administration?

1/ Some final words on the topic of William Jefferson Clinton from yours truly.

I don't talk about 'Big Dog' much, for many reasons, the overriding one is b/c quite frankly Hillary Clinton's husband has, as often as not, tended to either overshadow her or weigh her down.

2/ But I am not embarrassed to admit nor will I shy away from the fact that Bill Clinton is very special and very important to me. So very much of what I know about politics and even about life in some respects I learn directly from watching that man in action. It's just true.

3/ In many ways Bill Clinton is my Barack Obama to give some of you younger folks an idea of how important he was to myself & many Democrats at the time.

Though it's true I would eventually hitch my wagon to Hillary, then, at first, first, it was Bill.